When reading the articles below, keep one question in mind: Do you find these allegations credible and serious enough to deserve media coverage?This question is crucial because the mainstream media has been ignoring (and in some cases actively trying to discredit) the facts and arguments below for years now.

It is the job of a properly functioning media to investigate credible allegations about issues important to the people and determine their validity. America' s media appears to have failed so completely here that it should be considered completely broken, if not dead.

Over 1000 architects and engineers have signed petition to reinvestigate 9-11 destructionFebruary 23, 6:02 PMConspiracy ExaminerShawn Hamilton"At some level of government, at some point in time, there was an agreement not to tell the people the truth about what happened." John Farmer, Senior Counsel to the 9-11 Commission in his book The Ground Truth.Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth founder, Richard Gage, AIA, began the conference quoting Mark Twain who said, "If you don't read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read them you're misinformed." Gage said he hoped the assembled press would help to rectify that situation. "Today I'm quite pleased to announce that now we have more than one thousand architects and engineers signed on to the A&E911Truth; petition demanding of Congress a new and truly independent, unimpeachable investigation into the destruction of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9-11," Gage said to a cheering audience.

Numerous architects and engineers spontaneously spoke during the event about what had led to their decision to get involved in a movement that could potentially jeopardize their careers. Most agreed that it was the suspicious collapse of World Trade Center 7 that first caught their attention. No airplane hit the building and the fires were small. Gage said the fires were unlikely to have disabled the supporting columns all at once in order to quickly and neatly drop the skyscraper. There was also evidence of foreknowledge of World Trade Centers destruction. The BBC reported live that it had fallen twenty minutes before it actually fell; viewers could see the building standing in the background.Physics professor, Dr. Stephen Jones, along with an international team of scientists, analyzed World Trade Center dust from several sources and claims they found unmistakable traces of nanothermitic composite material--explosives that could be used to demolish the three skyscrapers. He and other architects and engineers say this explains the pools of molten metal found at ground zero weeks after the incident. Jones co-authored a peer-reviewed paper on the subject which led to his being fired from a tenured faculty position at Brigham Young University.…I asked Griffin why media outlets--even alternative ones--are typically so reluctant to even look at the 9-11 evidence."They say, 'We lose our credibility over here, then we can't do all this other good work,' overlooking the fact...I would say, as a rabid (laughs) member of the 9-11 Truth Movement, 'Look this outstrips anything else you could be exposing from the last ten years--or the next ten--unless there's another one, and if there is another one it will be partly your fault because you didn't expose this one."…

Editor's Note: The following column by former Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura was removed by Huffington Post after it was published March 9 and replaced with a note that states the site "prohibits the promotion and promulgation of conspiracy theories -- including those about 9/11."

You didn't see anything about it in the mainstream media, but at a recent conference in San Francisco, more than 1,000 architects and engineers signed a petition demanding that Congress begin a new investigation into the destruction of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9-11.That's right, these people put their reputations in potential jeopardy -- because they don't buy the government's version of events. They want to know how 200,000 tons of steel disintegrated and fell to the ground in 11 seconds. They question whether the hijacked planes were responsible or whether it could have been a controlled demolition from inside that brought down the twin towers and WTC Building 7.…I don't claim expertise about this, but I did work four years as part of the Navy's underwater demolition teams, where we were trained to blow things to hell and high water. And my staff talked at some length with a prominent physicist, Steven E. Jones, who says that a "gravity driven collapse" without demolition charges defies the laws of physics.

These buildings fell, at nearly the rate of free-fall, straight down into their own footprint, in approximately 10 seconds. An object dropped from the roof of the 110-story-tall towers would reach the ground in about 9.2 seconds. Then there's the fact that steel beams that weighed as much as 200,000 pounds got tossed laterally as far as 500 feet.

… molten metal found underground weeks later is proof that jet fuel couldn't have been all that was responsible.I visited the site about three weeks after 9-11, with Gov. Pataki and my wife Terry. It didn't mean anything to me at the time, but they had to suspend digging that day because they were running into heat pockets of huge temperatures. These fires kept burning for more than three months, the longest-burning structure blaze ever.And this was all due to jet fuel? We're talking molten metal more than 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit. …

…Gage is one of hundreds of credentialed architects and structural engineers who have put their careers on the line to point out the detailed anomalies and many implications of controlled demolition in the building collapses. As he puts it bluntly: "Once you get to the science, it's indisputable."

The Un-Debunkable Molten Metal

The photo shows a core column that has been cut with Thermite. (source: opednews)

WTC Building 7While these intelligence failures suggest at least the reasonable possibility of U.S. government complicity in 9/11, there is a mountain of physical evidence that directly implicates high-level government knowledge and participation in the planning and execution of September 11.Perhaps the most damning evidence lies in the bizarre collapse of WTC Building 7.Anyone familiar with the story of 9/11 knows about the collapse of the WTC North and South Twin-Towers. But a third high rise also fell that day. At 5:20 p.m., the massive 47-story steel frame Building 7, untouched by the hijacked airplanes, imploded in the exact manner of a professionally engineered demolition - at near free-fall speed, straight down, and with scientific precision into a compact pile of rubble, barely damaging any of the surrounding buildings.…The official explanation for the collapse is fire - as in fire weakened the building's structural support steel to the point where it could no longer hold its own weight upright.……Flames were visible on 3-4 floors of the building, having been apparently ignited by falling debris and ruptured diesel tanks at the base of the structure. And while relatively minor in severity, these fires were apparently responsible for the building's demise. But fire as the cause for collapse poses a number of significant problems - problems that break fundamental laws of nature.Firstly, fire from diesel fuel and building debris does not remotely approach the necessary temperature required to weaken and melt steel. Steel is melted and forged in sophisticated blast furnaces at incredibly high temperatures. Secondly, even if fire did cause the necessary weakening of the buildings steel support beams, each of those more than 50 beams would have had to weaken and fail at the exact same time to account for the symmetrical downward trajectory of the collapse.……no other steel frame building has ever suffered a total collapse anywhere on the planet before or after 9/11 due to fire (remember, Building 7 was NOT hit by an aircraft).……Another, and perhaps stronger, piece of evidence for controlled demolition of Building 7 is the speed at which the structure fell. It was a 576-foot tall building, and a conservative estimate of available video evidence shows that it fell in 6.5 seconds.A marble, with nothing but wind resistance in its path, would fall to the ground from the same height in roughly 6 seconds. Somehow, the top of this building fell to the ground in a perfectly symmetrical downward trajectory, with 47 floors of steel, concrete, and thousands of tons of upright standing debris in its path providing huge amounts of vertical resistance, at virtually free-fall speed. Allegedly because of random fires on a few floors.This is a physical and mathematical impossibility, violating laws in the conservation of momentum…

... Only controlled demolition… resolves the observed rate of collapse.Because in a controlled demolition, waves of progressive explosions from the top down would remove sections of resistant columns and supports, providing the vacuum-like pocket needed to account for the 6.5-second collapse. No other hypothesis,including the premise narrated in the 'official story',accounts for this speed.…

Collapsing BuildingsTHE NEW PHENOMENON OF STEEL BUILDINGS CRUSHING THEMSELVES[I circled in red the three buildings that collapsed on 9/11 (WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7). Notice that Building 7 (which wasn' t hit by a plane) was separated from the North Tower (WTC 1) by Building 6 and Vesey Street. Building 6 did not collapse on 9/11.]The seven World Trade Center buildings were in the two blue regions of the map to the right. On September 11th, ... 110-story WTC 1 and 2, and 47-story WTC 7 were leveled, …

…The "collapse" of Building 7 was remarkably tidy. Although it was wedged between the Verizon building and the U.S. Post Office building, it barely damaged either of them.…

The laws of physics appear to contradict the official story behind 9/11/2001. In a free press, this would be something worth investigating!

An Open Letter to The New York Timesfrom Christopher BollynApril 21, 2009Dear Mr. Hoyt and Editors of The New York Times and International Herald Tribune:

How can the New York Times completely ignore the scientific evidence of nano-thermite, or super-thermite, found in the dust of the demolished and pulverized rubble of the World Trade Center? Do you consider this crucial scientific discovery irrelevant to the understanding of what happened on 9-11?…The silence of the New York Times about the evidence of super-thermite in the destruction of the twin towers is a perfect illustration of why newspapers are going out of business in the United States: a controlled press is simply not relevant. ……Clearly, the New York Times is unwilling to publish the most pertinent information about vital matters concerning the American people, such as the search for the truth about what really happened on 9-11. This makes the New York Times irrelevant.The Times is in the same boat as the controlled press of the former Soviet Union and many of the leading newspapers of the United States. The controlled press is a boat that is sinking and that deserves to sink.Christopher Bollyn

An Open Letter to CNN and Time Warnerfrom Christopher BollynApril 28, 2009

Why is CNN & Time Warner Avoiding the Evidence of Super-Thermite in the Dust of the World Trade Center?…Dear Sirs:As one of the largest news networks in the United States, Time Warner's CNN is a source of information for millions of people. As a news network serving the public, CNN is expected to report honestly about the news and relevant developments connected to the important matters facing the nation.As the worst terror attack in U.S. history and the seminal event leading to the extremely costly "War on Terror," 9-11 remains a subject of great interest and importance to the American people — and the world.

CNN, however, has never shown any real interest in discussing the physical evidence of 9-11. When, for example, a CNN team came to Schaumburg, Illinois, in January 2007, to interview me as an independent journalist writing about 9-11, they showed absolutely no interest in discussing the evidence of explosives and steel-melting thermite in the destruction of the World Trade Center, although this was the key element of the research I had been writing about for the previous year or more. Rather than discuss the evidence of demolition, CNN seemed determined to frame me as an anti-Semite. I was repeatedly asked, "So, who did it?" To which I responded, "9-11 is an unsolved crime."

Failing to get me to say anything that could even be remotely construed as anti-Semitic, CNN relied on a video-editing trick in an obvious attempt to smear me.After I told CNN very clearly that I was not an anti-Semite, the video editors spliced in a clip of a woman from the Anti-Defamation League of the B'nai B'rith (a secret organization of Jewish Freemasons) taken in another city at another time, that made it appear that she was responding to my comments. Fortunately, we had recorded the entire interview with CNN and were able to show how CNN was not at all interested in the evidence from 9-11 but wanted only to smear me as an anti-Semite. Why would CNN even have such an agenda to attack a truth seeker of 9-11?Now, two years later, we have a scientific peer-reviewed paper that presents physical evidence of super-thermite (i.e. nano-thermite) found in the dust from the destroyed and pulverized World Trade Center. This is a crucial discovery because this is evidence of the extremely sophisticated and powerful explosive that pulverized the twin towers on 9-11. CNN, however, has yet to even report on this key discovery, which was published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal in March 2009. Why is CNN avoiding discussion of such crucial evidence of the explosives found in the dust of the destroyed twin towers? Is the scientific evidence explaining how the towers were destroyed of no importance to CNN?How can CNN ignore the scientific evidence of large amounts of nano-thermite, or super-thermite, found in the pulverized rubble of the World Trade Center?A recent study written by 9 scientists, including Dr. Steven E. Jones of Provo, Utah, has proven the existence of a highly-explosive thermitic material, "characterized as nano-thermite or super-thermite," in five different samples of dust from the collapsed towers of the World Trade Center. This paper, published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal, is an historic breakthrough in the scientific investigation of the explosive collapses of the twin towers, yetCNN has not even mentioned it.…This is the first time we have solid evidence of the unusual explosives involved in the demolition of the three collapsed towers. One would think that CNN would find such a development to be newsworthy. CNN's refusal to discuss the crucial evidence of explosives in the World Trade Center reveals that CNN is both controlled and opposed to discussing the evidence of what really happened on 9-11.

If the US mainstream media was alive and functioning, allegations this creditable about an issue this important would be addressed!The lack of meaningful media coverage on this issue alone is enough to declare the US media dead.

I, like millions of others, am still waiting for a mainstream paper to fully attend to the details of what these men are saying. Lay out the evidence, please.It does no good to offer comments from detractors that “they are imposters, liars and con-men.” Are they? Show us why this is so. We no longer react to serious questions based on emotion.These men are arguing based on the evidence collected. Any detractor must counter the evidence, not simply smear their character. Of particular seriousness is the collapse of WTC 7 and the evidence of explosive thermitic material found in four separate dust samples collected from ground zero.This peer-reviewed evidence has been available for one year already, and has been completely ignored by such “prestigious” and “reputable papers” as the Star, and refuted by no one.Why?

Conclusion:There may be a perfectly legitimate explanation to WT7. However, because the mainstream media has failed to address and investigate the issue, we are currently left with convincing evidence of thermite induced controlled demolition and an “official” explanation that defies the laws of physics. America's media is broken.

Finally, if the media is capable of ignoring something like this, then accepting the lack coverage about other issues of vital importance fraud in gold markets, the imminent 2010 food crisis, etc becomes easy.

It's not just America's media that's broken. It's the same all over the western world, at least when it comes to 9/11 and the war on terror. I recommend http://www.whatreallyhappened.com for alternative news sources. It was there I found Market Skeptics.

Unusual entry for your blog, but you are right on. Stay the course. There is no objective alternative explanation for WTC7 - the mental gymnastics required to subjectively accept every other reason to explain what you can clearly observe on video is simply a form of denial and participation in doublethink. The same holds true for our economy.There are three types of people - those who are living in conscious denial or deception, those who are in the process of waking-up and those who are already awake. You are seeing the bigger picture - continue doing what you do, it's important. Peace.

I am one of the Engineers that has signed the AE911Truth petition. I am fully convinced by physical evidence that the official 9/11 story is a lie. I am seeking for the truth, and would like to encourage others to be open minded enough to consider different views. Anyone that is not willing to consider the evidence has their head in the sand and will eventually die of suffocation. I invite all to take your heads out of the sand, look around, and take a breath of fresh air, because the truth will set you free.

In just one short article - you've just blown your hard-won credibility.

We've relied on you to uncover the truth from issues ranging from gold market manipulation to the dangers of deficit spending and hyperinflation.

All with sound-minded clarity.

Until now.

Now we find you are actually a believer in conspiracy theory - even when it makes no sense.

In Washington - where every politician is scared shit-less about pissing off the voters that got him there, doing the most expedient and gutless things just to coddle those same voters - and now we are to believe that these same spineless blow-hards have suddenly discovered the guts to actually hatch plots to target, maim and murder their own prized constituents that voted them into office in the first place?

And if found out, go to jail or the electric chair for mass murder?

All pretty courageous for a bunch of spineless politicians - don't you think?

I'm sorry Eric.

I must now re-consider all the previous research you've done, from gold market manipulation to all the other seemingly insightful theories you've proposed over the last few years - with an eye toward considering that you're a actually a nut-case who's been successfully masquerading as an astute observer of human, institutional and market behavior.

What was that great line by Alec Guiness - who fast-talked his way past the sentries in Star Wars...

"The Force has a strong influence over the weak minded".

Eric - don't go over to the Dark Side just when we need you most.

Where's your commentary on the upcoming banking legislation or any of a million other pressing issues?

- a secret agreement between two or more people to perform an unlawful act - a plot to carry out some harmful or illegal act (especially a political plot) - a group of conspirators banded together to achieve some harmful or illegal purpose

Name one area in politics / economics / military where this definition does NOT apply.

There will be a civil war in this country. Two sides. One--truthers. The other--sheeple and the federal fascist regime. We can already see the line in the sand. Which side will you choose? This is going to be fun.

As a matter of fact, anyone who doesn't believe in conspiracy theories, I tune off immediately because I know they don't have the foresight to see what's right in front of them.

Please read David Ray Griffin's book on WTC7; it is excellent and exhaustive. Pay special attention to, and google, Prof. Jonathan Barnett's work in the document known as FEMA Appendix C. Barnett found that very hot sulfur burned holes in a piece of steel from WTC7. Barnett professes not to know where the sulfur could have come from. It did NOT come from drywall, calcium sulfate; that is a chemical impossibility in a fuel or office fire. At the very least, arson was committed in WTC7 by someone with access to the building who knew 911 was coming. At worst, WTC7 was demolished using thermate (and perhaps other) devices. -Richard

I don't like being a tin foil hat conspiracy theorist. But that was SO convenient. Heinous crimes have been committed for much less profit than has resulted to Halliburton et al from this gigantic excuse to invade Iraq (anyone remember Friedman's famous statement, SUCK ON THIS?)

Aside from that, like many predications - Rachel Carson's Silent Spring for example - may be decades off the mark, but that is nanoseconds in the paleoclimatic timescale.

We ARE, already, experiencing mass extinctions, and there already IS famine in many parts of the world. Go ahead and ignore it, if you live in a place where it hasn't yet started. But it's coming soon, to a theatre near you. The best we can do is acknowledge the carnage that is already in the pipeline, and come together as a species to mitigate the devastation.

In addition to WTC7 guys, ever wonder why the buildings fell on that specific day, September 11th, 2001? Would you believe it has something to do with the national debt being at $6+Trillion? Listen in on this video:

to Robert: Oooh, in one article Eric questions the media's coverage on this topic and you suggest that Eric1) has lost all credibility2) is going over to the "Dark side" 3) is saying that a bunch of spineless politicians "did it" (which he in no way suggested)

HAHA. You are a big joke RobW. Two possibilities your are emotionally unstable, or you are a CIA shill. Either way it is your intellectual credibilty which is now shot.

Noam Chomsky outlined the media's role in propaganda a long time ago. The ideas are fundamentally true, there is no doubt that the media is not "a free press" (literally and figuratively; someone is paying) nor is it functioning as the 4th estate.

Here are some of the intellectual underpinnings of Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky (you can watch the movie on Google video). For people who don't like theory, he has a litany of facts and dates and times and examples of things like "the Operative Soundbite". However just head over to the NY Times site and look at what their headlines are ...at this moment "Financial Reform Bill Poses Big Test for Lobbyists" - what a puff story, not a discussion about whether the FUNDAMENTAL problems of the system and OUTRAGE/DEBATE over whether the bill rights those problems, nope, the debate is framed in ridiculous terms - even offering up the obvious fact lobbyists are filling politicians campaign buckets - so let's all talk about that at the dinner table HAHA. Manufacturing consent, if you don't know it, read it, wake up people.

Some snippets from the video (with time index)

400 Manufacturing consent what is that meant to describe? Lipman. He said that manufacture of consent is a revolution in the practice of democracy....The common interests ellude the public, they have to be the domain of a specialized class. Notice this is an opposite view of democracy.

500 Rationality belongs to the cool observer, but because of the stupidity of the naive man he follows not reason but faith. This naive faith requires necessary illusion and emotionally potent oversimplifications provided by the myth maker to keep the necessary person on course.

540 The point in a feudal state it doesnt much matter what the public think because you can control them with a bludgeon. When you cant control people by force, ...you have to control what people think. The standard way to do this is propoganda....

500 20% of population relatively eduacated makes role in decision making. Participate in social life, such as those who write, teach and they vote. Their consent is crucial. That 20% need to be deeply indoctrinated. 80% of population is to follow orders and the mythmaker.

605 Primarily about the national media. The elite media are the agenda setting NYTimes, WashingtonPost, they set the general framework. "Operative sound bite" , "Selection of topics", "Distribution of Concerns", "Framing of issues", "Filtering of Information", "Bounding of debate"

4012 To eliminate confusion all of this has nothing to do with liberal or conservative bias. Both liberal and conservative wings of the media....falls within the same framework of assumptions. If the system functions well it ought to have a liberal bias...ie. if indeed press is adversarial and liberal and extreme how can I go beyond it?

4130 Who owns them? The major agenda setting media. They are large corporations owned by even larger coporations/conglomorates. GE etc.

4215 How specifically control the media? The elite don't control they own it.

4245 If you get the to the point where they dont pay attention to you, it is because there are people with power, people who own the countryr and they are not going to let the country get out of control.

9/11 was a gift to the neocons, maybe they left the way clear for it to happen.

but evidently, you think that:

the exact nature and time of the attacks were known, and the buildings were able to be rigged to collapse under the cover of the attack - but for what purpose? It's not enough to have planes hit the buildings, they have to fall down too?

Why? why chance the discovery of the conspiracy? All the things that could go wrong, or be discovered at a later time . . (e.g. there would STILL be thermite residue at ground zero ) . the neocon agenda would be completely gutted.

and as for thermite used in building 7 - How could it be known ahead of time that building 7 would be so badly damaged/set on fire by debris? In other words, how could the conspiracy know there'd be cover for the thermite demolition? nearby buildings - I think one or two that were closer to the north tower than 7 - were not so badly damaged.

so this all presumes this great need to have the buildings collapse, for what? To enhance the psychological effect of the attack?

what an absolutely dumb idea.

You'd have to be dumb to do it, and then also smart enough/organized enough to keep investigators and media from talking about it.

your main point is 'the media wont address the controlled demolition theory' - the reason is that it's abhorrent to many people, it's offensive, it's not politically correct . . it's not possible to have a dialogue about this in the mainstream media.

other institutions - like universities and foreign governments - also gagged individuals who tried to talk about controlled demolition. Not just media.

It is really unbelievable for one non-American to see reaction of some Americans when it comes to talk about "911" (I mean particularly on "A" and some of the similar comments here).

It really looks that for some "professional" Americans all LOGIC - died long time ago...

I just wonder if those persons EVER ask them selves 2 (two) SIMPLE questions:1. - How many airplanes crushed?---(A: 2)2. - How many buildings collapsed?---(A: 3)

Next FACTS are interesting too:* The smallest (WTC7) one collapsed - even that NO airplane crushed on it! * The smallest one (WTC7) was "only" 70 floors "small" and collapsed in FREE FALL (less that 9 seconds!)* The smallest one (WTC7) - as it is possible to see even in Erics text - was positioned FAR from 2 higher buildings targeted by planes, and it was "DIVIDED" from "Twins" with OTHER buildings!

Just those "small" facts - make enormous distrust - in "logic" and common sense of persons like "A".

Unfortunately, it looks that American brain-washing is still very strong.

When Greenspan as operative of the Fed, and therefore connected to the Fed and elites says"

“I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,” he says. link

And George Bush says

''We will defeat the terrorists," Bush said. ''We will build a free Iraq that will fight terrorists instead of giving them aid and sanctuary."

"...they would create a new training ground for future terrorist attacks," Bush said. ''They'd seize oil fields to fund their ambitions. They could recruit more terrorists by claiming a historic victory over the United States and our coalition." link

Obviously a child can put two and two together that terrorist theme is being fed to the masses for geopolitical war.

The biggest issue I get out of this thread is that - It is psychologically difficult to accept that the truth when we're being inundated with lies on TV. The truth being that private interests and elites rule the country (with no regard to the Constitution). SO all bets are off on .- It is easy to disrupt rational discourse about a topic when stooge elements disrupt the flow with outlandish statements.

Ozzimandis, it's kind of like people saying Rachel Carson was an hysteric.

Her predictions are coming true. Creatures from birds to butterflies, frogs to bats, are dying at a rate that in hindsight will be recognized as extinction.

Our atmosphere is so polluted with toxic ozone from burning fuels that vegetation cannot photosynthesize...and plants are the bottom of the terrestrial food chain. There's less and less food for animals to eat.

Crops will fail spectacularly this summer, and then there will be less and less for people to eat.

Ozzy, crops did fail last summer! It will just be more spectacular this summer, because the background level of tropospheric ozone is inexorably increasing.

However, I do think the gradual decline of trees has suddenly taken a dive, since the summer of 2008 and frankly, I am not sure why. I would very much like to know however, because then there might be some possibility of arresting the impacts before they go extinct.

Here are the possibilities I have considered: 1. just have reached an intolerably high level of cumulative damage; 2. the government-mandated addition of ethanol to gasoline (virtually no one is testing the emissions of ethanol for acetaldehyde or peroxyacetyl nitrate formation and what impact that might have on plants - I've been told it's too expensive); 3. HFC levels have risen dramatically, so how that affects the composition and impact of ozone is anyone's guess; 4. there is some unknown synergy of chemistry going on with high levels of nitrogen used for fertilizer in biofuel agriculture and/or increasing UV radiation or even, cell phone radiation mixing with pollutants.

One thing is certain - there are 70,000 industrial chemicals in use today, and only 200 of them have been tested for their affects on human health, let alone tree and plant and animal health. Not to mention how they interact with each other.